Friday, May 03, 2013

Church of Scotland - 'Jews Have No Right To Israel'

A report commissioned by the Church of Scotland titled "The Inheritance of Abraham? The 'Promised Land,'" essentially says that the Jewish people have no right to Israel, using the same sort of reasoning prevalent in replacement theology, an anti-semitic reading of Christianity that claims that G-d's Biblical covenant with Abraham is null and void because, you know, it's the Evil Jews:

The church, which in recent years has jettisoned its once philosemitic character, opened a wide rift with the Scottish Jewish community with the report. Among other controversial statements, the report argues that, “Christians should not be supporting any claims by Jews, or any other people, to an exclusive or even privileged divine right to possess particular territory.”

'Christians should not be supporting any claims by Jews, or any other people, to an exclusive or even privileged divine right to possess particular territory'? Well then,Jimmy, that should include the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians and want an apartheid state where Jews won't be permitted, shouldn't it? As a matter of fact, it ought to include the Scots, who have a referendum on independence from the UK coming up next September.

If the Church of Scotland is going to take this stance, I expect them to be in the front lines opposing both. Unless they're filthy hypocrites, which is more likely, isn't it?

You see, this report attempts to use a blatantly skewed and selective reading of scripture to legitimize what is de facto Jew hatred and anti-semitism, the singling out and denial of the right of self determination to the Jewish people alone.

It quotes a number of rabidly anti-Israel writers and uses a ridiculously inaccurate reading of Israel's history to make the point that the Jews have no right to a country because of their 'injustice' to the Arabs calling themselves Palestinians. No mention is made whatsoever of the attempts at the genocide of every Jew in Israel the Palestinians were eager participants in, or the almost 1 million Jews expelled from the Arab world simply because they were Jews.

The Church commissioned report will goto its annual general assembly, where its 700 members will vote on whether to make it official Church policy. Given the Church's recent record of anti-Israel activity, I wouldn't be at all surprised if this latest outrage is adopted.

Scottish Council of Jewish Communities Director Ephraim Borowski said the church should withdraw the report.

"On behalf of the Jewish community of Scotland, we call upon the church to withdraw it [the report] from the forthcoming general assembly. If the Church cannot build bridges, can it at least refrain from burning them?" Borowski told the London Jewish Chronicle newspaper.

Mr. Borowski misses the point. The  reason the Church of Scotland commissioned this report in the first place was to provide justification and cover to burn those bridges. Simple as that.

The irony is that given the rapidly increasing Muslim population of Scotland and the low birthrates of native Scots, the members of the Church whom vote for this atrocity are going to find out that turning against Israel and the Jews isn't going to win them any points with their new masters.

Nor will it win them any points with Almighty G-d, if history is any indication. Ask the Romans, Egyptians, Babylonians, Spain, the Nazis...

On the other hand, if you believe that G-d runs this world, then Israel  exists, either as a test or as a precursor to messianic times by His grace and design.

So we'll see whom lasts longer, shall we? A declining church embracing anti-semitism and dhimmi status or the modern miracle of Israel, the Jewish homeland.

1 comment:

louielouie said...

if what passes for memory serves me, a couple of weeks ago, ff posted an essay regarding st. andrews canceling a jooish event/fund raiser due to the threat of violence.
i didn't say anything at the time, but what i thought was their excuse was a false flag.
st. andrews didn't have the balls to turn them down to their face, but canceled the event on the perceived premise that violence had been threatened.
reading this essay just makes me think, hmmmmmmmmmm.........